Absolutism is eating the United States alive

Submitted by Stephen (Japan), Aug 3, 2008 at 07:10

I agree with a lot of the comments in your post. In Europe there is a dangerous trend of criticising the US or Israel simply because they exist, and the threat of islamification has prompted some very strange changes in France, Germany and the UK. However, there were some aspects of your comment that I can't agree with.

jennifer solis said: "The Allied victory of WWII is a very, very distant memory to most Europians. It could be argued that the U.S. forces were the most instrumental in this victory, and that Europe was just the beneficiary. When someone is given something, rather than paying (or fighting) for it themselves, they appreciate it and value it less."

Such a comment shows that your knowledge of the whole affair is heavily distorted and biased. Yes the United States were a key force in winning the war, but this does not mean that Europe sat back and reaped the benefits. The US had merely 1 attack on home soil, and at a military base at that, yet the scars of the war are still visible in the streets of London. Europe was not just "given" an undeserved gift by the US, they fought tooth and nail for a victory. The war is still deep in many people's consciousness, and it is for this reason that the EU was formed and why it continues; to economically bind the countries so that another war cannot take place.

You speak as if Europe were Communist Russia and talk as if capitalism has no faults at all. How much more black and white can you get? Much of Europe is of course chiefly capitalist, which keeps money flowing and keeps standards rising and rising. Yet while much of America lies in poverty, has high gun-crime, and the generally poorer ethnic minorities are in social chaos, the various socialist aspects (eg. limited welfare state, trade unions, semi-nationalised health care) of some countries in Europe, serve to keep poverty to a minimum and ensures greater equality.

What is hapening in modern American capitalism is a resurrection of the 19th century bourgeois/proletarian distinction that fuelled Europe's empire building aspirations and eventually desroyed it. Both modern and ancient history tell us many, many times over that a 100% capitalist society will eventually end up destroying itself; too few people will end up being able to buy products. The outcome can only be mass poverty through economic depression leading to civil war and collapse OR a deperate campaign of foreign war.

What do you think caused World War Two in the first place? and what happened to the Roman Empire? or the British Empire? You talk about "military victory" as if it were inevitable and desirable, but the true motivation is not the prospering of US citizens or the winning of freedoms... The United States is feeling the pinch of the failures of pure capitalism coupled by a forcast lack of oil. If were to introduce social checks, it would have signed and ratified the Kyoto Protocol, cooperated with other nations and started to actively encourage alternative energy sources. Yet it has chosen to lash out at other countries under the thinly-veiled pretext of a morally higher cause.

Yet the whitewash has begun to peel. American citizens no longer see their country as beyond criticism. My American friends no longer exhibit that kind of uniquely-American, blinkered patriotism that seemed to characterise the American personality and frustrate many Europeans (thereby adding to the false impression that we anti-American). Many US citizens are crying out for some sort of social intervention. The success of such films as "Sicko" attests that.

In conclusion, I agree that an unchecked socialist leaning in a capitalist society can easily turn to communism, yet the outcome of unchecked capitalism are just as bad for a country. You cannot see things in such a black and white way; "capitalism good, socialism bad"... "4 legs good, 2 legs bad"?. The only theoretically stable system lies in grey territory: capitalism balanced with some form of social control through (limited) government regulation. The social aspects need to be kept in constant check, to ensure that abusers of the system are not getting away with it (eg. by introducing a 3-month limit to unemployment benefit in the UK).

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".